1 / 31

Comparison of Pooled and Household-Level Usage Impact Analysis

Comparison of Pooled and Household-Level Usage Impact Analysis. Jackie Berger Ferit Ucar IEPEC Conference – August 14, 2013. Presentation Outline. Motivation Billing Analysis Usage Impact Models Model Results Summary and Next Steps. 2. MOTIVATION. 3. Usage Impacts.

zaccheus-meboo
Download Presentation

Comparison of Pooled and Household-Level Usage Impact Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Comparison of Pooled and Household-Level Usage Impact Analysis Jackie Berger Ferit Ucar IEPEC Conference – August 14, 2013

  2. Presentation Outline • Motivation • Billing Analysis • Usage Impact Models • Model Results • Summary and Next Steps 2

  3. MOTIVATION 3

  4. Usage Impacts • Were expected energy savings results obtained? • Are the treatments cost-effective? • Should measure selection procedures be revised? • Should installation procedures be reviewed? • Should contractors be re-trained? 4

  5. Analysis Method • Goal: develop most accurate estimate of program savings. • Weigh costs and benefits of various approaches to measurement. • Consider possible causes of mis-measurement or bias. 5

  6. What Are You Measuring? 6

  7. Analysis Approaches 7

  8. Billing Analysis 8

  9. Data Requirements 9

  10. Challenges 10

  11. Treatment and ComparisonGroup Example 2010 2012 2011 Treatment Group Pre-Treatment Period Post-Treatment Period SERVICE DELIVERY DATE Comparison Treated Year Before Post Yr 1 – Quasi Pre Post Yr 2 – Quasi Post SERVICE DELIVERY DATE ComparisonTreated Year After Pre Yr 1 – Quasi Pre PreYr 2 – Quasi Post SERVICE DELIVERY DATE 11

  12. Usage Impact Models 12

  13. House-by-House 13

  14. Pooled Analysis Fit=αi+ β1* Hit+ β2*POSTt+β3*POSTt*Hit+εit • Fit = average daily usage during the pre- and post-treatment periods • Hit = average daily base 60 HDDs • POSTt = a dummy variable that is 0 in the pre-period and 1 in the post-period • εit = estimation error term • PRE USAGE • αi = average daily baseload usage in pre-treatment period. • β1 = average daily usage per HDD in the pre-treatment period. • POST USAGE • αi + β2= average daily baseload usage in the post-treatment period. • β1 + β3= average daily usage per HDD in the post-treatment period. • SAVINGS • β2 = average daily baseload savings • β3 = heating usage savings per HDD. 14

  15. Advantages 15

  16. Disadvantages 16

  17. When to Use 17

  18. Model Results 18

  19. Program 1 ResultsGas Heating Jobs 19

  20. Program 2 ResultsGas Heating Jobs 20

  21. Program 1 ResultsElectric Baseload Jobs 21

  22. Program 2 ResultsElectric Baseload Jobs 22

  23. Program 1 ResultsElectric Heating Jobs 23

  24. Program 2 ResultsElectric Heating Jobs 24

  25. Program 1 ResultsHousehold Characteristics 25

  26. Program 1 ResultsHousehold Characteristics Major measures include refrigerators, air conditioner, and water heater replacements. 26

  27. Program 1 ResultsHousehold Characteristics 27

  28. Summary and Next Steps 28

  29. Summary • Overall savings results fairly consistent • Differences between models rarely statistically significant • Gas usage results were more consistent • Electric baseload varied most 29

  30. Conclusions • Sources and potential biases caused by large data attrition should be explored. • When additional analysis is desired for many subgroups and data attrition is low, house-by-house may be favored. • When data attrition is high and only overall usage results are desired, the pooled regression may be preferred. 30

  31. Next Steps • Additional exploration of differences. • Explore deletion of various types and numbers of observations from house by house. • Compare results with different levels of attrition. • Test different functional forms for the pooled model. 31

More Related